Last edited:
Hi Everyone,
I am a big fan Anesthesiology and toyed with the idea of entering the field. I am a current resident in another field in need of an operation next week that is relatively routine (1-1.5 hr procedure). However, I expressed to the surgeon and his staff that I do NOT want a CRNA (I believe in "your" field's training) caring for me during the operation (MD/DO Anesthesiologist only)
I was informed that an Anesthesiologist would be present for induction intubation/extubation. But, there is a circulating CRNA who may come to the room to watch over me. This concerns me less. However, I am not sure how big a "stink" to make about it. I pushed pretty hard about not wanting a CRNA.
I appreciate everyone's thoughts and inputs. I will continue to be your advocate outside your speciality.
Hi Everyone,
I am a big fan Anesthesiology and toyed with the idea of entering the field. I am a current resident in another field in need of an operation next week that is relatively routine (1-1.5 hr procedure). However, I expressed to the surgeon and his staff that I do NOT want a CRNA (I believe in "your" field's training) caring for me during the operation (MD/DO Anesthesiologist only)
I was informed that an Anesthesiologist would be present for induction intubation/extubation. But, there is a circulating CRNA who may come to the room to watch over me. This concerns me less. However, I am not sure how big a "stink" to make about it. I pushed pretty hard about not wanting a CRNA.
I appreciate everyone's thoughts and inputs. I will continue to be your advocate outside your speciality.
It depends on why you are asking about the size of the stink....
If you are worried about being rude in the context of the world at large. Who cares. You are the customer and you set your expectations which they can either meet or call your bluff, then you back down or go elsewhere
If you are doing it at your hospital...then it gets more complicated as people gossip and you could anger the nurses as a group
No problem with supervising residents covering the case after induction/extubation. CRNA's do not equal MD/DO residents in my mind (of course there is always the bad apple resident or EXCEPTIONAL CRNA). But, we are talking about averages.
Demand physician administered anesthesia. It is your choice. Make a big deal out of it. Being there during intubation and extubation isn't the same thing.
I supervise a CRNA and I can't get her to tape the eyes before intubation - ever. I tell her all the time. I know actually have to tape the eyes.
The point is, even if there is no difference, you should get what you want.
Demand physician administered anesthesia. It is your choice. Make a big deal out of it. Being there during intubation and extubation isn't the same thing.
I supervise a CRNA and I can't get her to tape the eyes before intubation - ever. I tell her all the time. I know actually have to tape the eyes.
The point is, even if there is no difference, you should get what you want.
Might I add a counterpoint. If said Crna won't tape the eyes before incubation, has she ever had a complication? If she does hold her accountable and she should be fire for dereliction from standard practice.Demand physician administered anesthesia. It is your choice. Make a big deal out of it. Being there during intubation and extubation isn't the same thing.
I supervise a CRNA and I can't get her to tape the eyes before intubation - ever. I tell her all the time. I know actually have to tape the eyes.
The point is, even if there is no difference, you should get what you want.
Well done.Hey Everyone, I appreciate the insight. Spoke with the anesthesia group today. They informed me I will have MD/DO only for administration. I think being a clinician that is well respected here helped. I always appreciate the training/expertise you all have as Anesthesiologists. Do not undersell yourself and think patients will not value it as well (no matter what everyone tells you... you bring extra value). You have to just know your value. Cheers.
Well done.
No place that has anesthesiologists shou,d ever refuse the right of a pt to request to have an anesthesiologist present for the entire procedure.
I recommend you find a way.Uhh... you work with all anesthesiologists right?
We run a really tight ship doing 4+ cases supervision and that simply ain't happening...
Unless this is a VIP and we get creative with the pain schedule or someone is willing to come in while on vacation.
We put friends and family with a good crna and make frequent visits. Luckily this is easy since we employ our crnas and the bad ones get the boot.
This is disturbing to me.You read my whole post? Like I said, there's a way. It's just not gonna happen in 99.99% of the cases we do.
No offense to the OP, but most patients that demand to have me in the room the whole time are probably going to be a pain in the ass and can go somewhere else for surgery if that's what they want.
I'll stick to making an anesthesia plan and having competent crnas that follow it to a T
Now, if I'm having surgery somewhere that I don't know the crnas, I understand and agree that you're much more likely to get good care by requesting an anesthesiologist. Simply too many crappy crnas get pumped out of mills each year.
This is disturbing to me.
You are too good to take care of pts yourself one at a time?
And the pts that request an anesthesiologist are "probably going to be a pain in the ass".
I thought the old guys that raped our specialty were bad.
I recommend you find a way.
The AANA talks a good game "we are cheaper "
Yet when push comes to shove.
Crna's in the trenches i have close relationships with. They all will not work a full call schedule for anything less than 300k.
Why should they accept less? They already making 180k and working 36 hours with no calls and no weekends.
That daytime MD 7-3 makes only 220-250k.
The spread difference between Md and crna isn't great when comparing apple to apples (working hours and calls and nights and weekends)
Send them to me.could not be done in our hospital and if a patient wanted it, I'd recommend they purchase a plane ticket since they would not be in driving distance of a place that could do it for them.
Now if somebody wants me to be the one that intubates their class 1 airway, that's fine. I'm standing there anyway and do that often enough anyway. But if they care that I am the one that turns the dial on the sevo from 3 to 2 for their ASA 1 self having a lumbar lami, well i have other patients that are just as important to attend to. But like I said, I support their right to fly somewhere else to have their surgery.
Send them to me.
And yes, if a patient would absolutely refuse to let my competent crna be in the room without me after I explain our way of doing things, they would be a pain in the ass and could go somewhere else.
Sounds like you would definitely be getting surgery elsewhere
It saddens me to think a patient would be considered a PITA for politely requesting an anesthesiologist. I don't understand that. I'm paying the same whether there is an anesthesiologist taking care of me throughout or the "collaborative" model where I have no clue who is involved and have to obtain medical records to learn it took 3 different anesthesiologists (2 who I never even met) and a CRNA for a short elective surgery planned over a month in advance. I like knowing that the anesthesiologist I meet prior to surgery is there throughout. If it makes me a PITA for requesting an anesthesiologist, I hate that, but so be it.
This is real-world ACT private practice. Done properly and appropriately, ACT is perfectly safe and acceptable for most, if not all, procedures.could not be done in our hospital and if a patient wanted it, I'd recommend they purchase a plane ticket since they would not be in driving distance of a place that could do it for them.
Now if somebody wants me to be the one that intubates their class 1 airway, that's fine. I'm standing there anyway and do that often enough anyway. But if they care that I am the one that turns the dial on the sevo from 3 to 2 for their ASA 1 self having a lumbar lami, well i have other patients that are just as important to attend to. But like I said, I support their right to fly somewhere else to have their surgery.
Respectfully, I disagree. I work in an ACT model, and I don't believe a physician can be there for induction and emergence (and definitely not for the all key moments of a case), even with "just" 1:3 coverage. Even being present for every induction and emergence is a big deal in any fast-paced setting with unhealthy patients preopped on the day of surgery. Maybe in a culture where anesthetists are required to call the attending to the room before inducing or extubating, or where turnover is 30-40 minutes and the cases are long. Even then, running around all day long is physically exhausting. I tend to believe that any coverage beyond 1:2 is basically midlevel anesthesia with physician firefighters and/or cookbook medicine.This is real-world ACT private practice. Done properly and appropriately, ACT is perfectly safe and acceptable for most, if not all, procedures.
Those of you in high-volume practices (and I'm talking tens of thousands of cases a year) understand this. If you want an anesthesiologist to personally do your case, that's certainly possible, but you better arrange it in advance in our practice - and I'm not talking the day before. We start our day with over 100 anesthetists and 35 or more docs. We have patients occasionally show up on the day of surgery wanting MD-only anesthesia. That's simply not going to happen. Every single anesthesiologist in our practice is committed to specific responsibilities in our practice every day, and those assignments are scheduled a couple months in advance. Our surgeons know the way we practice. They're perfectly comfortable with it. We are a tertiary referral center, 100% private practice. Our anesthesiologists do all regional, blocks, and central lines. EVERY patient has an anesthesiologist present at induction and emergence, and as often, and for as long as necessary, as needed throughout the case. That idiotic study from one of the ivory tower centers that claims that 1:4 medical direction is not physically possible has zero idea of what they're talking about, because it can be and is being done every day in many practices.
Respectfully, I disagree. I work in an ACT model, and I don't believe a physician can be there for induction and emergence (and definitely not for the all key moments of a case), even with "just" 1:3 coverage. Even being present for every induction and emergence is a big deal in any fast-paced setting with unhealthy patients preopped on the day of surgery. Maybe in a culture where anesthetists are required to call the attending to the room before inducing or extubating, or where turnover is 30-40 minutes and the cases are long. Even then, running around all day long is physically exhausting. I tend to believe that any coverage beyond 1:2 is basically midlevel anesthesia with physician firefighters and/or cookbook medicine.
I still have to see one single practice (even academic one) where things are done 100% by the book, meaning that all seven TEFRA requirements are met for every case. Meaning (among others) that the attending develops the plan and the anesthetist follows it to the letter (as a resident would), or that the attending is physically in the room for every key moment of a case (e.g. peritoneal insufflation for a laparoscopic case, or turning a patient prone etc.) Or just simply every emergence. It's just not possible in the real world. Not only that, but it's frowned upon by most anesthetists, who don't like to feel "micromanaged". Given the fact that most practices can't afford pissing off their anesthetists, one can guess what really happens (not the BS that's sold to patients). There are parts of the country where even SRNAs will occasionally give attendings attitude. (That's an entirely different story, but there is an entire generation of young militant CRNAs that have been raised and taught by the old militant CRNAs - who were much fewer and less militant.)
So, on topic, there is no better care than a good solo anesthesiologist (who works solo every day). It's a dying breed, at least in my neck of woods (except for cardiac or day docs). The ACT model is good enough, but it's not the golden standard of quality care. Yes, there are some great anesthetists out there, who know what they don't know, ask for help even after 30 years of practice, and follow attending instructions to the letter (and would be great even solo). But they are the exception. Unfortunately, as more and more attendings are forced to practice in an ACT model and don't get enough/any solo time, we are reaching the point where even a smart patient won't want a doc anymore, because the doc will be rusty.
tl;dr: The best care is probably a solo anesthesiologist in a MD-only practice. Good luck finding one in certain parts of the country.
Then let me tell you the newest East Coast (AMC) model I've seen: anesthesiologist candidates for a job get interviewed also by CRNAs, who can have even veto power over their hiring. Plus this is not like most of team medicine (e.g. ICU), where the plan is discussed in detail, and approved by the physician first. The system is not built for that. The system is built for greed and making the most money, not for the best quality of care. Meaning that while the big decisions are left to the physician, many small ones belong to the anesthetist. Some anesthetists frown on anything that means more work and/or changes their cookbook medicine recipe, e.g. not using versed in elderly or keeping their BP high enough. When one has to phrase one's requests as "what do you think about..." versus "please do this or that" it's not medical direction, it's supervision or worse. When one's employment is conditional on not pissing off the CRNAs (or other nurses), it's not true medical direction. Plus, unless there is a computerized record in place, most attendings cannot regularly check on the patients' vital signs and the anesthetists (as required by law), unless they run around like headless chicken all day long.Different perspectives, different experiences. I have no problem with MD anesthesia in the places that are able to do that, but an increasing number of places simply aren't set up to do it that way.
You don't need to be there from the moment the patient rolls in the room until the incision is made. Similarly, you don't need to be in the room at the time the last staple goes in until the patient rolls out to PACU. How frequently a doc checks on the progress of a case is a function of the type and length of the case, as well as the patient's condition. A 20-30 minute lap chole probably doesn't require an intra-op check at all. An OB hemorrhage might require near continuous attendance of the anesthesiologist (maybe more than one). We are fortunate to be able to staff accordingly. We aren't so tight that we don't have extra pairs of hands available at a moment's notice.
Our anesthetic plan is, for the most part, MAC, general, or regional. Since all our blocks and regional are done by the doc, that's never an argument. Unless there are specific issues, there's no need for the anesthesiologist to give a laundry list of what to do in a given case. Our OB practice runs like clockwork. We have a number of specific procedure protocols (outpatient total joints in particular) where each case is done almost identically. (standardization is not a bad thing) There's no need to call the anesthesiologist for changes in vital signs that are easily managed, but calling with sustained and/or significant changes is a given. Our newer anesthetists are "micro-managed" to a certain extent until they are well-oriented.
It depends on how much time you think you need to spend at induction, emergence, etc., how you define your "key moments", as well as how much you trust and depend on your anesthetists to do the right thing. We don't have arguments about technique. It's understood that our practice is ACT with an anesthesiologist in charge, yet that relationship is quite collegial and professional, and there is much mutual respect for the roles that all of us play. We happily hire both AAs and CRNAs, but the chain of command is crystal-clear from day one. Those who don't understand that likely aren't hired in the first place or won't last long if they are.
Then let me tell you the newest East Coast (AMC) model I've seen: anesthesiologist candidates for a job get interviewed also by CRNAs, who can have even veto power over their hiring. Plus this is not like most of team medicine (e.g. ICU), where the plan is discussed in detail, and approved by the physician first. The system is not built for that. The system is built for greed and making the most money, not for the best quality of care. Meaning that while the big decisions are left to the physician, many small ones belong to the anesthetist. Some anesthetists frown on anything that means more work and/or changes their cookbook medicine recipe, e.g. not using versed in elderly or keeping their BP high enough. When one has to phrase one's requests as "what do you think about..." versus "please do this or that" it's not medical direction, it's supervision or worse. When one's employment is conditional on not pissing off the CRNAs (or other nurses), it's not true medical direction. Plus, unless there is a computerized record in place, most attendings cannot regularly check on the patients' vital signs and the anesthetists (as required by law), unless they run around like headless chicken all day long.
Of course, all of this is highly variable and dependent on local culture. But, in a market where most anesthesiologists are used especially as preop monkeys and firefighters, employers care more and more about keeping their anesthetists (and not anesthesiologists) happy. A good anesthetist gets work much easier than a good anesthesiologist, for the simple reason that there are more jobs for the former. In such places, medical direction is more of a wish than reality.
Respectfully, I disagree. I work in an ACT model, and I don't believe a physician can be there for induction and emergence (and definitely not for the all key moments of a case), even with "just" 1:3 coverage. Even being present for every induction and emergence is a big deal in any fast-paced setting with unhealthy patients preopped on the day of surgery. Maybe in a culture where anesthetists are required to call the attending to the room before inducing or extubating, or where turnover is 30-40 minutes and the cases are long. Even then, running around all day long is physically exhausting. I tend to believe that any coverage beyond 1:2 is basically midlevel anesthesia with physician firefighters and/or cookbook medicine.
I still have to see one single practice (even academic one) where things are done 100% by the book, meaning that all seven TEFRA requirements are met for every case. Meaning (among others) that the attending develops the plan and the anesthetist follows it to the letter (as a resident would), or that the attending is physically in the room for every key moment of a case (e.g. peritoneal insufflation for a laparoscopic case, or turning a patient prone etc.) Or just simply every emergence. It's just not possible in the real world. Not only that, but it's frowned upon by most anesthetists, who don't like to feel "micromanaged". Given the fact that most practices can't afford pissing off their anesthetists, one can guess what really happens (not the BS that's sold to patients). There are parts of the country where even SRNAs will occasionally give attendings attitude. (That's an entirely different story, but there is an entire generation of young militant CRNAs that have been raised and taught by the old militant CRNAs - who were much fewer and less militant.)
So, on topic, there is no better care than a good solo anesthesiologist (who works solo every day). It's a dying breed, at least in my neck of woods (except for cardiac or day docs). The ACT model is good enough, but it's not the golden standard of quality care. Yes, there are some great anesthetists out there, who know what they don't know, ask for help even after 30 years of practice, and follow attending instructions to the letter (and would be great even solo). But they are the exception. Unfortunately, as more and more attendings are forced to practice in an ACT model and don't get enough/any solo time, we are reaching the point where even a smart patient won't want a doc anymore, because the doc will be rusty.
tl;dr: The best care is probably a solo anesthesiologist in a MD-only practice. Good luck finding one in certain parts of the country.
I am sure they are right, too. There are market forces at work against all of us. The problem is that we too will get paid APRN salaries in the future (when compared on an hourly basis), the same way primary care docs don't make much more than their midlevels (when adjusted to the amount of work and responsibility).Thank god ive never run into this arrangement.
What's interesting is, I stay in touch with some of the CRNAs from my old group- the non militant ones. They are great people and I enjoyed working with them, just not some of the others. Anyway, they are very concerned for their futures, I guess they have some internal data that shows a glut of anesthetists by 2020; AAs are displacing them from jobs, apparently the bigger groups there are preferentially hiring AAs. It sounds like one group in town started hiring AAs and it's catching on. They feel threatened and insecure.
They are convinced their pay is heading into advanced practice nursing territory, 100k or so.
It's just interesting to me to hear their perspectives since so often we believe the opposite.
I am sure they are right, too. There are market forces at work against all of us. The problem is that we too will get paid APRN salaries in the future (when compared on an hourly basis), the same way primary care docs don't make much more than their midlevels (when adjusted to the amount of work and responsibility).
Let's dissect the $300K community anesthesiologist salary with Q5 overnight call, even without late days. That's 6 calls/month, about 1/3 without the consecutive day off (Fri or Sat call). So that's 23 days x 8 hours + 6 call days x another 16 hours - 4 post-call days x 8 hours = 248 hours/month, so about 3000/year. Minus 1/8th of that (taken as vacation and fewer and fewer holidays) makes about 2600 hours/year. That's about $115/hour, i.e. CRNA salary, except that CRNAs would get an overtime/call bonus. 😉
And people wonder why I have no respect for medical students who look forward to getting into anesthesiology today.
Will get worse if CRNAs get independence because there will be a downward pressure on CRNA salaries due to their oversupply.
How the hell did docs let the CRNAs do spinals/epidurals/regional/lines/etc? I still can't get around how that happened.
You don't see cardiologists teaching their nurses how to do a cath or GI docs showing their nurses how to do a scope.
An NP's Journey to Credentialing for Colonoscopy
I thought I've heard of people agitating for midlevels to start doing caths as well but I can't find anything online.
An NP's Journey to Credentialing for Colonoscopy
I thought I've heard of people agitating for midlevels to start doing caths as well but I can't find anything online.
Respectfully, I disagree. I work in an ACT model, and I don't believe a physician can be there for induction and emergence (and definitely not for the all key moments of a case), even with "just" 1:3 coverage. Even being present for every induction and emergence is a big deal in any fast-paced setting with unhealthy patients preopped on the day of surgery. Maybe in a culture where anesthetists are required to call the attending to the room before inducing or extubating, or where turnover is 30-40 minutes and the cases are long. Even then, running around all day long is physically exhausting. I tend to believe that any coverage beyond 1:2 is basically midlevel anesthesia with physician firefighters and/or cookbook medicine.
I still have to see one single practice (even academic one) where things are done 100% by the book, meaning that all seven TEFRA requirements are met for every case. Meaning (among others) that the attending develops the plan and the anesthetist follows it to the letter (as a resident would), or that the attending is physically in the room for every key moment of a case (e.g. peritoneal insufflation for a laparoscopic case, or turning a patient prone etc.) Or just simply every emergence. It's just not possible in the real world. Not only that, but it's frowned upon by most anesthetists, who don't like to feel "micromanaged". Given the fact that most practices can't afford pissing off their anesthetists, one can guess what really happens (not the BS that's sold to patients). There are parts of the country where even SRNAs will occasionally give attendings attitude. (That's an entirely different story, but there is an entire generation of young militant CRNAs that have been raised and taught by the old militant CRNAs - who were much fewer and less militant.)
So, on topic, there is no better care than a good solo anesthesiologist (who works solo every day). It's a dying breed, at least in my neck of woods (except for cardiac or day docs). The ACT model is good enough, but it's not the golden standard of quality care. Yes, there are some great anesthetists out there, who know what they don't know, ask for help even after 30 years of practice, and follow attending instructions to the letter (and would be great even solo). But they are the exception. Unfortunately, as more and more attendings are forced to practice in an ACT model and don't get enough/any solo time, we are reaching the point where even a smart patient won't want a doc anymore, because the doc will be rusty.
tl;dr: The best care is probably a solo anesthesiologist in a MD-only practice. Good luck finding one in certain parts of the country.
I was talking about 1:3+ settings. The ones I have worked in have been mostly 1:2, and I personally always meet TEFRA requirements.I think you just haven't seen well run practices then. We meet TEFRA for 100% of cases. I am electronically time stamp signatured in to case during induction and emergence. Can't fake it. It is possible in the real world. Is it tiring some days? Sure. But I get paid to work, not sit on my ass. You just work in a poor setting with CRNAs that aren't your employees.
JWK, how many practices in our country are like yours?Different perspectives, different experiences. I have no problem with MD anesthesia in the places that are able to do that, but an increasing number of places simply aren't set up to do it that way.
You don't need to be there from the moment the patient rolls in the room until the incision is made. Similarly, you don't need to be in the room at the time the last staple goes in until the patient rolls out to PACU. How frequently a doc checks on the progress of a case is a function of the type and length of the case, as well as the patient's condition. A 20-30 minute lap chole probably doesn't require an intra-op check at all. An OB hemorrhage might require near continuous attendance of the anesthesiologist (maybe more than one). We are fortunate to be able to staff accordingly. We aren't so tight that we don't have extra pairs of hands available at a moment's notice.
Our anesthetic plan is, for the most part, MAC, general, or regional. Since all our blocks and regional are done by the doc, that's never an argument. Unless there are specific issues, there's no need for the anesthesiologist to give a laundry list of what to do in a given case. Our OB practice runs like clockwork. We have a number of specific procedure protocols (outpatient total joints in particular) where each case is done almost identically. (standardization is not a bad thing) There's no need to call the anesthesiologist for changes in vital signs that are easily managed, but calling with sustained and/or significant changes is a given. Our newer anesthetists are "micro-managed" to a certain extent until they are well-oriented.
It depends on how much time you think you need to spend at induction, emergence, etc., how you define your "key moments", as well as how much you trust and depend on your anesthetists to do the right thing. We don't have arguments about technique. It's understood that our practice is ACT with an anesthesiologist in charge, yet that relationship is quite collegial and professional, and there is much mutual respect for the roles that all of us play. We happily hire both AAs and CRNAs, but the chain of command is crystal-clear from day one. Those who don't understand that likely aren't hired in the first place or won't last long if they are.
That is f*cked up.."
We have 160+ anesthesiologists and just short of 300 CRNAs.
From personally having pts ask for MD only, mostly from the coasts, I can say that we never entertain that question. Our answer is some variation of, "People come, often long distances, to us because we are good, and the ACT is how we are good, so if you ask us to change, it will only derail why we are good."
But I get paid to work, not sit on my ass. You just work in a poor setting with CRNAs that aren't your employees.
Another example of unnecessary attacks on your compatriots!If you think you're doing this great service for patients by sitting on your stool in autopilot mode, keep telling yourself that.
So I'm not so delusional to think that I am any better at this profession than anyone else on this site. I just have a bit more experience than many here and I wish to share it. You can accept that as rhetoric or as experience, I don't care other than I believe that there is no better anesthetic than an anesthetic delivery solely by an anesthesiologist. However, I am not so delusional to think that this is possible in our country. There just isn't enough of us. And I don't disagree with anyone that claims that there are some fantastic nurses or AA's doing this job as well. I have worked with some ( an AA actually taught me how to do an axillary block). And yes I would let them perform my anesthestic in a pinch but by no means would I take them over a personally chosen anesthesiologist.
So what I'm getting at is that if "we" want to maintain the physician basis of this specialty then we need to come together and support as much physician delivered anesthesia as we can possibly manage. I get it that some practices can't manage even the slightest bit of this. That saddens me but I understand the constraints. I also wonder if this is financially driven more than anything. Don't tell me that you can't recruit physicians when your senior partners are making more than the national average though. This is bullsh*t. If you live in an area that can't support hiring physicians then your cost of living is more than likely extremely lower than the national average and this argument holds no water.
So stop saying that the ACT model is the best. Instead, say it's the best you can do and live with it.
Why do people on this site feel the need to attack others that are basically on the same side as them?
This is unnecessary.
That is f*cked up.